World-first social media ban for under-16s


Australia will move to ban social media for children under the age of 16, with the federal government expected to introduce world-first legislation to Parliament before the end of the month.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced the minimum age requirements for social media on Thursday, “calling time” on the harm social media is having on Australian children.

But with a trial of age verification technology continuing, the government is yet to land on an approach to impose the ban, which is not expected to come into effect before 2026.

Image: Shutterstock.com/Cristian Dina

Mr Albanese said the proposed age threshold, which follows months of consultations and culminated in a Social Media Summit in NSW and South Australia last month, will be put to National Cabinet for sign-off on Friday.

But he is confident the decision taken by his Cabinet on Monday gets the balance right, despite the concerns of 100 academics, 20 world-leading international experts and 20 Australian civil society organisations.

Under the proposed legislation, social media platforms like Meta, TikTok and X will need to “demonstrate they are taking responsible steps to prevent access” to children under the age of 16 or face penalties, Mr Albanese said.

Just how this will be done remains to be seen, with the government continuing an age assurance trial that is testing verification technology that is also expected to extend to online pornography at a later date.

Tender documents released in September show biometric age estimation, email verification processes and device or operating-level interventions as among the technologies being assessed.

Proposed legislation for the social media ban is not expected to come into force until 12 months after passage, with Communications minister Michelle Rowland indicating this is deliberate.

“There is a sound reason why there is a one-year lead in time. It is to enable to government to give this legislative intent life but also to ensure that its implementation is capable of being done in a very practical way,” she said.

Even the prospect of legislation had already led to new initiatives by social media companies, Ms Rowland said, referring to Meta’s decision in September to put Instagram users under the age of 18 into new “teen accounts”.

But Digital Industry Group Inc (DIGI), the industry group representing Meta, Apple, Twitter and Google, has labelled the ban a “20th Century response to 21st Century challenges” and called for a more “balanced approach”.

“Swimming has risks — but we don’t ban young people from the beach, we teach them to swim between the flags,” DIGI managing director Sunita Bose said.

“Banning teenagers from social media risks pushing them to dangerous, unregulated parts of the internet and fails to equip them with the valuable digital literacy skills they’ll need for the future.”

Ms Bose also said that in order to enforce the ban “all Australians would have to provide their personal information, such as an ID or an image of their face, to verify their age”.

UNICEF Australia’s head of policy and advocacy Katie Maskiell said that “while social media is often attributed as the cause of this youth mental health crisis, evidence says that the reality is much more complex”.

“Our primary focus should be on changing the very design of digital environments, by implementing a safety-by-design approach, and having stronger regulations in place that shape and govern those online platforms,” Ms Maskiell said.

The threshold proposed by the federal government is different to what was recommended to the South Australian government by former High Court justice Robert French, who earlier this year said social media should be restricted for children under 14.

Ms Rowland said the eSafety Commissioner will be responsible for enforcement, with penalties to be issued to social media companies that resist or challenge the requirements.

Definitions of age restricted social media platforms will be taken from the Online Safety Act but that there is some flexibility for those definitions to be narrowed through regulations. Exclusions and exemptions will also be considered.

Ms Rowland added that the final report from an independent review of Australian online safety laws, which landed on her desk last week, had highlighted the inadequacy of existing penalties.

Penalties of up to $782,500 for each day of non-compliance can be levied against a company — significantly less than the maximum fines available to other regulators, both in Australia and overseas.

“The fact is that social media has a social responsibility, but the platforms are falling short. And while the government may not be able to protect ever harm for every child, every place, every time that it occurs, we can make a difference.”

Updated at 2:55pm

Do you know more? Contact James Riley via Email.

Leave a Comment

Related stories